Posted on 11/30/2011 11:38:02 AM PST by ReformationFan
It's another slogan that passes for thought among the thinking-averse: "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality...." The rest of the sentence remains unspoken for fear that laughter might break out. "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality; therefore He approves of it."
First of all, that's what's known as an "argument from silence;" a logical fallacy. By this rule Jesus would be made to endorse rape, cannibalism and lots of other nasty stuff. Secondly, we cannot know whether Jesus, in His brief earthly ministry, ever mentioned homosexual sin specifically (see John 21:25), so the claim can't be substantiated. But the slogan is not only unverifiable and non-rational; it reveals ignorance of what we know Jesus did say. Though His teachings recorded in the gospels don't directly address the issue of same-sex sex, the Scriptures leave no room for an honest reader to conclude that Christ condones any sin, including this one.
Before we look at what Jesus said about homosexuality, let me explain my purpose in writing this. It isn't to put anyone down, or to say, "Jesus hates fags." If the Lord hated homosexual sinners, He would have to hate heterosexual sinners (like King David), and certainly murderers (like David, Moses and Paul), thieves, and so on, right down to jaywalkers. And me. And all Christians. If the Son of God had hated us sinners, He certainly wouldn't have endured torture and death on the cross to rescue us. To rescue us from our sins. My one intention is to help other believers respond to the far-less-than-half-truth that "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality."
Jesus' affirmation: The morality of the Old Testament is still valid
Contrary to the popular misconception, Jesus is not the Second Moses. He didn't come to give us new laws, or to hand out free passes to break the old ones. Christ didn't have to stand on a mountain and repeat by name every sin mentioned in the Old Testament for all of those sins to remain sins. God, by definition, doesn't change; therefore He does not change His ideas about what's right and wrong. If sin is not sin, then God is not God. *
Jesus addressed all sins generally when He said, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." (Matt. 5:17,18) Again in Luke 16:16,17 He said, "The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since then the gospel of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of the Law to fail."
Far from smashing the moral code revealed to Israel, Jesus didn't even relax it — He tightened it.
"You have heard that the ancients were told, 'You shall not commit murder....' But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court.... You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery,' but I say to you, that every one who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart." (read Matt. 5:21ff)
In this less-loved portion of the Sermon on the Mount, the Lord continues with four more laws — each time with that same formula: You have heard...but I say — each time showing not that the Law of God has been repealed; rather, that it reaches deeper than we ever knew.
Jesus' premise: The original pattern is God's will
In answering a question about divorce, Christ lays a foundation that has implications for our topic.
And some Pharisees came to Him, testing Him, and saying, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all?" And He answered and said, "Have you not read, that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh'? Consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate and divorce her?" He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart, Moses permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it has not been this way." (Matt. 19:3-8 NASB, emphasis mine — see also Mark 10:2-9)
His argument assumes that God created things a certain way because (duh) that's the way He wanted them. If we can get back to the original pattern, before sin marred the picture, we'll be able to see God's will for human sex and marriage. That heavenly will, restated here by the Lord, is one man and one woman united in marriage for life.
Christ taunts the Pharisees, faulting them for not deducing God's perfect will regarding marriage from the simple words, the two shall become one flesh. The implications of the fact that before God joined them, He made them male and female are even more elementary.
Homosexual behavior and "gay marriage" aren't going to fit into this primal pattern, which Jesus here places above the Law of Moses. If "serial monogamy" between man/woman couples isn't God's will, then neither is anything further outside the lines drawn in the opening chapters of Genesis. Jerry Falwell popularized this argument, "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." He created them male and female for a reason. Creation involves design, and design reveals intent.
There are at least two other ways that Jesus spoke out against same-sex sex. I hope to examine those next time.
* Disbelievers have been known mock this truth, conflating universal laws with rules given to Israel to make it unique; failing to differentiate the ceremonial from the moral; and confusing changing punishments for sin, with the unchangeable sinfulness of sin. A digression for their sake is either unnecessary or unmerited.
And apparently, if you are angry with another person, you are guilty of murder.
Mithra along with all pagan religions are based in individual spirituality with a savior and that the flesh and acts of the flesh are of no consequence. However, according to YHVH, the only thing that is based on individuality is final judgment when we all will stand before Him and give account for ourselves one by one. All things the flesh does affects the entire society. Those actions bring either blessings or curses to the entire society as well as our individual lives.(Dt 28; Joshua 7)
Take for example a person that has aids, it does not just affect that one person, it affects many for generations. Torah that came to us in the flesh as Yah’shua Messiah teaches us that disease is the result of sin(John 5:13-15) and Scripture tells us that sin is the transgression of Torah.(1 John 3:4)
When Yah’shua said in Mt 22:40 that all the law & prophets hang on Dt 6:5 & Lev 19:18, the word ‘law’ that was translated into Greek is “Torah” aka “Moses” according to Yah’shua Messiah thus it is according to Moses that all sin will be judged.
Following Torah brings both blessings & curses(Dt 28-30). Blessings for those that follow it and curses for those that don't. For the life of me I can not understand why nearly 2000 yrs ago the doctrine of Christendom chose to bring curses instead of blessing to its ecclesia and why the supposed learned theology scholars continue to hide the truth and teach that which curses rather than that which blesses.
Didn’t Jesus declare all the laws had to be followed?
No, it is those who do not study to show themselves approved who are the ones of misunderstanding. Blessings that come from following Torah are for all mankind. Yah’shua never taught that the dietary laws were abolished as these instructions are vital in obtaining the health related blessings one receives from following them. Yah’shua rebuked the rabbinic oral law of hand-washing, not the law about what is food and what is not food.
Mt 15:1 Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, 2 “Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.”
3 He(Yah'shua) answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ 5 But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”— 6 then he need not honor his father or mother.’ Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. 7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:
8 ‘ These people draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
9 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”
10 When He had called the multitude to Himself, He said to them, “Hear and understand: 11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” 12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?”
13 But He(Yah'shua) answered and said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14 Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.”
Rabbinic oral law says that unwashed hands defile food, however Yah’shua said it is the words that come out of ones mouth that defile. Also, if Yah’shua & his disciples were eating anything other than what Torah defines as food, Yah’shua would have been disqualified as Messiah as the Messiah never broke even the least of his Father's commandments let alone teach anyone else to break them.
Can you, using Scripture ALONE, define what food is?
small point of correction - Jesus is the second person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit is the third person.
but the point is correct, the whole Bible is the word of God, since the Holy Spirit is the author.
And that..was beautiful truth perfectly articulated.
foreknowledge does not foreapproval...we have a free will and we are therefore responsible for our actions. The fact that God knows what we will do, does not mean that He approves of it!!!
The Old Covenant included the Ten Commandments, the civil laws and the priestly laws. The New Testament actually validates the Ten Commandments, but the rest of the Old Testament Law has not been validated. At the heart of the Law was the temple and the Levitical priesthood chosen to offer animal sacrifices. Obviously, today it is impossible to obey the part of the Law that requires the temple and sacrifices. The Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) established that Gentile believers were not bound by the civil and priestly laws.
No the question doesn’t lead to second guessing God. It’s just question to you not god. Of course it doesn’t matter, but I am politely asking your opinion. Isn’t that one of the reasons for forums?
Why do you think God wanted to teach Job such a lesson?
How do you explain God knowing something will happen and being incapable of being wrong? If God knows something will happen doesn’t it have to happen? After all, He knows the time of our death doesn’t He? We don’t have any control over that, do we?
How do you explain God knowing something will happen and being incapable of being wrong? If God knows something will happen doesn’t it have to happen? After all, He knows the time of our death doesn’t He? We don’t have any control over that, do we?
Me either...except that I have never broken any rules or denigrated any group of people, faiths or beliefs. I just ask questions, mostly about why someone believes as they do.
So far I favor Cain, believe strongly in states rights, strongly support the 2nd amend and pro-capitol punishment.
Better?
So it was to teach him a lesson. Ok thanks
Did you read Post 39?
The Word is indeed quite plain about sexual sin. Those holding the truth in ungodliness will find out the error of their ways sooner or later.
**If we confess Jesus as God, the third Person of the Trinity....**
I thought trinitarians believed that the Son is the ‘second person’ of the trinity. Did the the coequal, coeternal Holy Ghost get moved up to second place? If so, on which lap?
I believe that Jesus Christ is God because of the eternal Spirit, which is the Father in him (John 4:24).
Your questions have a motive other than wanting to engage in conversations with people or become more edified.
What do mean by bearing in mind...? Our free will choice could never be anything other than what God knows it will be, could it? And He knows the future too?
So why do you think God creates those He knows will sin?
You’re right about that last para. I misread it.
Yes, I didn’t ask God, and I’m aware of the outcome and benefits of the story. I asked you why you think God saw fit to put Job through all that? Just to teach a lesson
?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.